Talk:List of circle topics

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the List of circle topics article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Lists

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Mathematics Mid‑priority

	Mathematics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mathematics, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mathematics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MathematicsWikipedia:WikiProject MathematicsTemplate:WikiProject Mathematicsmathematics articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-priority on the project's priority scale.

List of circle topics

This discussion page has a rather unconventional beginning. Apparently B9 hummingbird hovering (talk · contribs) began the page by copying an entire block of discussion from his own talk page. A permanent link to the copied material is here.

I have added a highlight to the material that was copied from another page, since I think it is relevant. This is not the usual way to manage a talk page; henceforth let's stick to the conventions. Thanks —Duae Quartunciae (talk · cont) 05:32, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dude, it would help create a more cooperative collaborative working environment if you didn't try to unilaterally "hijack" the page to make it something other than it's been, without even discussing anything on the relevant discussion page -- not to mention that adding links to random vaguely circle-shaped objects doesn't necessarily do anything to improve the page... AnonMoos 06:38, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Dude read the edit prior to my first edit. Your statement is erroneous. I simply reworded the list introduction to reflect what was and is. The textual introduction was false. If you feel so inclined, it would be appropriate to extract all mathematical items and create a new list rather than deleted wisdom and work won through diligence. B9 hummingbird hovering^{(talk • contribs)} 06:42, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

1) Please do not include religious proselytization terminology when leaving comments on my user talk page. I really don't care what your religion may be, and it would be nice if you could conceive the idea that I don't feel like changing mine (or even particularly discussing it at all in the current context).

2) If you're so spiritually personally enlightened, then why can't you discuss things on the relevant discussion page before making radical changes to the scope and focus of an article??? AnonMoos 17:12, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do not and did not proselyze. I am not religious. Your conscience is your own. I have made no claims of enlightenment. Your attributions of intention and motive to me is false and a casebook example of psychological projection. Yet again I affirm, your fixation on the mathematical nature of this page was not grounded in what is, which was decidedly non-mathematic prior to the point in spacetime that my first edit ever graced this 'category list'. Some unsolicited though needed advice: Read deeply, don't just surface graze!

Blessings = "Take Care"

B9 hummingbird hovering^{(talk • contribs)} 23:43, 2 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

After the addition above, the whole was removed by AnonMoos (talk · contribs), and replaced with a section heading. Here's the edit, on 22:23, 3 August 2007. I'm just putting here the text used. —Duae Quartunciae (talk · cont) 05:37, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This space provided for User:B9 hummingbird hovering to finally at last explain why the focus and scope of this article should be radically changed:

Now it is time for a comment on my own behalf. No harm, no foul, on some rather interesting use of a discussion page! :-) Henceforth, let's follow the usual guidelines, which are in the header I have placed at the top od the page.

As for the matter of dispute, this is a simple case. User:B9 hummingbird hovering, I appreciate that you are acting in good faith to include additional material you think relevant and interesting for circles. Be that as it may, your proposed changes are a total reversal of the clearly indicated purpose of the page, and you should not have made such a drastic change to the whole topic without any discussion. I am reverting your changes entirely. You can try and make a case for including them, but you should do that here, and not by reverting stuff in the main article. The scope of your changes are far too sweeping. As a friendly word of advice, you have no chance of carrying this debate. The page is on the mathematical aspects, not metaphoric or mystical aspects. This has been clear in the article lead, for years. Breath deep, let it go, and go in peace. Thanks —Duae Quartunciae (talk · cont) 05:44, 6 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]